GRAND RAPIDS, MI – Six months after voters agreed to pay $4 million more per year in the form of a parks tax, city leaders now will get another new source of revenue – and this one they’re calling the final piece to the puzzle of putting Grand Rapids on sound footing for the long haul.

Grand Rapids voters on Tuesday, May 6, agreed to an income-tax that will generate upwards of $10 million annually through 2030 for “vital streets.” Instead of getting a scheduled 13.3-percent cut in July 2015, income tax rates for city residents and non-residents who work here will stay at current levels for 15 more years.

The existing rates were authorized in May 2010 by a 204-vote margin – with 15 percent of registered voters showing up to the polls.

The streets tax cruised to a win by a 66 to 34 margin and a 12,068 to 6,123 vote count. Turnout was at about 13.7 percent of the city's 130,184 registered voters.

“Some of these roads will knock your molars out,” said Tim Glasser, who voted yes at Martin Luther King, Jr. Leadership Academy in the city’s Third Ward. “It’s fairly self-evident to me that we need to make some improvements.”

Whereas voters in 2010 approved a 15.4 percent rate increase for five years, the proposal before them Tuesday was to continue that increase at no additional cost.

Several yes voters mentioned to MLive that they won’t pay any more with the new tax. Others said they were sold by a second ballot proposal that sweetened the deal that the city, not adjacent property owners, will start paying for sidewalk repair and construction.

“That (second proposal) maybe inspired me a little bit to vote yes,” said Dale Versluis, a First Ward property owner with tree roots pushing up sidewalk in front of his home. “I’ll take a carrot.

“There’s no raise (in the tax rates). It just continues with the promise of better roads.”

Grand Rapids leaders pitched the tax proposal as a way to fund road improvements. The city a decade ago spent about $8 million per year from its general fund on roads. But that number has dwindled to nothing as state funding of local governments has been cut and Grand Rapids has spent money on other priorities, including a pension liability that surged after investments soured at the end of the last decade.

At the same time, revenue from the state’s gas tax has stagnated, prompting the city to curb road maintenance.

Still, many Grand Rapids voters remained opposed to a streets tax, even after a rough winter opened up thousands of potholes around the city.

“I’m just sick of taxes going up,” said Joseph Sapp, a Second Ward voter who cast his ballot at Plymouth Christian School. “They always have an excuse to spend money. They need to make budget choices more wisely.”

The Grand Rapids Taxpayers Association, a campaign committee that sued the city to force the proposals off today’s ballot, called the streets tax a "bailout” that won’t force Grand Rapids to cut more out of its budget. That was a general theme voiced by no-voters today.

“City government should do a better job of managing their finances,” said Kevin Webster, a Third Ward voter who also opposed the 2010 income tax proposal. “Far too much money is wasted.

“(Road funding) is really a state government issue. We definitely need to do a bit more rearranging of our (public) finances and spend money where it’s most needed.”

Gov. Snyder last year called for $1.2 billion in new road funding from the state, but Michigan lawmakers have not pursued his plan. A Fix Our Roads GR campaign urging a yes vote touted the proposal as a way for Grand Rapidians to take the future of their city streets into their own hands.

Grand Rapids will be Michigan’s first city with an income tax earmarked specifically for streets.

“Quite frankly, what we’ll probably see if we don’t get road funding accomplished (at the state level) is we’re going to see many more of our communities needing to go and do that, not from an expansion type of look but from a maintenance and preservation look,” said John LaMacchia, a legislative associate for the Michigan Municipal League.

The 2010 income tax increase helped Grand Rapids cover budget shortfalls and bought the city time to trim its long-term cost structure through union concessions, job cuts and new service models. The city’s draft 2014-2015 general-fund budget runs a $1.8 million surplus, albeit without putting as much money into parks as yesteryear’s budgets, or any money into streets.

Like the city’s water and sewer systems, which are funded by user fees, Grand Rapids now will have similar funding streams for its parks and street systems. The parks tax takes effect in July and will run through 2021, adding about $4 million per year to the $5 million spent annually on parks from the city's general fund.

City road improvements will be funded largely from the new streets tax fund. And by the time the tax expires in 2030, Grand Rapids could seek some kind of user fee for roads such as a charge for vehicles miles traveled. A task force that recommended the ballot proposal explored that concept before pushing the income tax.

In addition to financial stability, the streets tax will help Grand Rapids pursue environmental and social objectives. Up to 16 percent of the revenue will go toward sidewalk, with at least 84 percent to be spent on “vital streets” – a term the city is using to describe not just the pavement surface but other amenities within the public right-of-way, including storm water features, trees, street lights and bicycle lanes.

Grand Rapids previously had pondered user fees to maintain the city’s street lighting and storm water systems. Some of that work now can be done with “vital streets” money as roads get rebuilt.

Some tax opponents criticized the “vital streets” concept at an MLive forum on the ballot proposal last month.

“The bicycle lanes they put up are nuts,” said Tom Bolter, who cast a no vote at Seventh Reformed Church in the city’s First Ward. “For 100 years we didn’t need bicycle lanes until ‘Gen. George (Heartwell)’ decided we need them.

“(This tax) is just like giving candy to a baby. You give it to them and they’re going to eat it. If we give (the city government) money, they’re going to spend it.”

Marc Olejniczak was among thousands of yes voters happy to oblige.

“It’s such a small amount (out of your paycheck),” said the Third Ward voter who also supported past tax proposals for parks and public transit. “It just makes the city a better place to live.

“I’m tired of potholes. The roads need to get fixed and it’s not going to happen magically.”